PreDread
Ensign
Posts:173
 | | 13 Jun 2008 02:27 PM | | Hey guys,
Maybe we should start an official thread just to discuss building, launching and weaponizing locomotive torpedoes.
Lots of people on here have some good ideas concerning locomotive torps. It would seem the two most promising candidates are torps powered by Propel gas or my small electric motors and batteries.
Both have their advantages/disadvantages...
I used to be 100% in favor of gas powered torps... but after doing a little searching for pager motors, I'm truly shocked at how small they really are. They could definately work with small enough batteries.
Has anybody been tinkering with these tiny little motors yet? I'm going to order some in the next few days.
| | | |
|
Powder Monkey
Veteran
Rear Admiral (RDML)
Posts:1467
| | 13 Jun 2008 05:59 PM | | But will they fire from my yellow submarine [:p] | | IRCWCC Fast Guns New England Task Force, http://netfrc.com USS Massachusetts BB 59 South Dakota Class Battleship Awards
2008:
Nothing But Wet, and it sure was fun 2009:
Best of scale War Ship
Ball Buster award So do or do not. There is no try | |
|
JohnmCA72
Commander
Posts:701
| | 14 Jun 2008 07:38 PM | | I think that the biggest problem with self-propelled torpedoes is the range. I believe most of us can imagine the wake of a torpedo as it speeds toward a ship, just like we've seen it thousands of times in movies. The problem is that, to get that visual effect, the "fish" needs to be in the water for a considerable amount of time. The reason that this is a problem is that the long time needed for the visual effect means that the torpedo's effective range would be considerably greater than what clubs currently allow for "gun"-style torpedoes, & even considerably greater than any warship's guns themselves.
All clubs that I know of that allow gun-style torpedoes restrict them to 1-2 feet of range. You're not going to get the visual (never mind the performance needed to penetrate a hull) out of a powered torpedo at that range. In all fairness, no club should allow powered torpedoes' range to exceed gun-style torpedoes' range; that would make everybody's gun-style torpedoes instantly obsolete & completely devalue their investments. It makes no sense for a club, that might have 10 guys who have gun-style torpedoes, to suddenly make their systems worthless just so 1 guy can have something that looks cool, even if it might actually happen to work at the "correct" scale range.
To achieve the desired visual effect, a self-propelled torpedo will have an effective range many times that of any warship's guns. Consider the effect that it would have on a combat game, for a torpedo-armed ship to be able to attack effectively without fear of being damaged by return fire.
Not all issues are technical. If there's some reason OTHER THAN the cool visual effect to use self-propelled torpedoes as a weapon that by rule are limited to an effective range of 12-24", I haven't seen it posted.
JM
| | | |
|
Greg McFadden
Rear Admiral (RDML)
Posts:1416
| | 14 Jun 2008 08:30 PM | | I am going to have to disagree with you John. whatever clubs currently allow, I believe the goal was a actual self propelled torpedo (if someone can come up with a way to do it). Consider the long time in the water... if it is in the water a long time, the target ship will have ample time to dodge or otherwise get out of the way or turn into the oncoming spread. Now if the torpedo speeds were limited to the same speeds as they were in real life, scaled to whatever speed rules each club used, you would maintain your balance. E.G. if the fish were 40 knot fish, they go the same speed as a 40 knot ship. Said torpedos would be a hazard to everyone in their way, just like real life.
back on the actual topic... the best idea I came up as far as the "warhead" for lack of a better term was a tube within a tube with a compressed spring/piston storing a sufficient punch to put a hole in balsa inside the inner tube. Monofilament line would hold the spring/piston compressed and would travel back and out of the housing through a lined up hole in both tubes. The outermost tube would be slid forward a bit and at the little hole where the monofilament leaves the body on the side would be sharpened sufficient to cut the monofilament. when the torpedo strikes a ship, the ship pushes the outer tube back, severing the monofilament, releasing the piston.
Or something like that. If done right, most parts could be plastic/very thin metal and ballasted/filled properly to float. behind that section, one could use the pager motor and a very small battery, such as a watch cell or if you are allowed a big enough diameter, nimh cells are available in .4" od... use a spring connection on the outside of the torp with a thin bit of plastic preventing contact to keep the fish off. launch from ship, plastic bit stays behind, torpedo starts... | | | |
|
Powder Monkey
Veteran
Rear Admiral (RDML)
Posts:1467
| | 14 Jun 2008 08:41 PM | | They would have to be on or dam near on the surface to be effective where are you going to get the buoyancy | | IRCWCC Fast Guns New England Task Force, http://netfrc.com USS Massachusetts BB 59 South Dakota Class Battleship Awards
2008:
Nothing But Wet, and it sure was fun 2009:
Best of scale War Ship
Ball Buster award So do or do not. There is no try | |
|
Kotori87
Rear Admiral (RADM)
Posts:2279
| | 15 Jun 2008 01:22 AM | | here's a use for a powered torpedo: making submarines better. Currently, every operational Big Gun submarine in the world uses a button on the bow to trigger its torpedoes. I think it's wrong that a submarine has to ram its opponent in order to shoot. I don't care about the visual effect of a torpedo cruising towards its target, or about limiting torpedo velocity to correct scale speed. If I could extend a submarine's effective torpedo range out to even 3 feet, I would be happy. | | | There are 101 different types of people: those who understand binary, those who don't, and those who just can't count... | |
|
admiraljkb
Ensign
Posts:154
| | 15 Jun 2008 04:29 AM | | Powered torps in 1/72 scale are probably possible, but I seriously doubt in 1:144 due to severely reduced mass.
For some history on the subject (written 10 years ago)
The Condensed History of Big Gun Torpedo Development:
http://rcwarships.org/rcwarships/nwc_new/?category_id=27&menuaction=phpbrain.uikb.view_article&art_id=10
The Condensed History of Big Gun Submarine Development
http://rcwarships.org/rcwarships/nwc_new/?category_id=27&menuaction=phpbrain.uikb.view_article&art_id=11 | | | |
|
Mike Horne
Ensign
Posts:234
| | 15 Jun 2008 07:54 AM | | I think that the technology is improving, and some neat things are becoming possible. Let's not forget that there is a good bit of damage that can be caused just by the "air/water" ram effect from cannons at close range. Now that many people have lathes, and the pager motors and smaller are available, then I see that eventually somebody is going to succeed in a really cool design. Perhaps the compressed air capsule idea that was sent recently will make a design that gives a big splash :) Perhaps the combat effect of ranges needs to be looked at, but with all the good ideas coming in, I think it's going to be solved.
Mike | | | |
|
JohnmCA72
Commander
Posts:701
| | 15 Jun 2008 08:16 AM | | quote:
Originally posted by archer183
I am going to have to disagree with you John. whatever clubs currently allow, I believe the goal was a actual self propelled torpedo (if someone can come up with a way to do it). Consider the long time in the water... if it is in the water a long time, the target ship will have ample time to dodge or otherwise get out of the way or turn into the oncoming spread.
That may be (or not). However, that doesn't change the fact that the torpedo-firing ship would be able to effectively fire at gun-armed-only ships at ranges at which they would be immune from their targets' guns. IMO, you just can't allow something to be immune from counter-fire; it's tantamount to allowing a ship with a fully-impregnable hull. I'd be very strongly opposed to allowing any torpedo system that outranges guns at all, let alone by orders of magnitude.
quote:
Now if the torpedo speeds were limited to the same speeds as they were in real life, scaled to whatever speed rules each club used, you would maintain your balance. E.G. if the fish were 40 knot fish, they go the same speed as a 40 knot ship. Said torpedos would be a hazard to everyone in their way, just like real life.
They would also be ineffective in terms of their kinetic energy being able to puncture a hull. They'd need some sort of "warhead", as you note, which creates plenty of problems (not that they can't be solved to everybody's satisfaction, possibly).
quote:
back on the actual topic... the best idea I came up as far as the "warhead" for lack of a better term was a tube within a tube with a compressed spring/piston storing a sufficient punch to put a hole in balsa inside the inner tube. Monofilament line would hold the spring/piston compressed and would travel back and out of the housing through a lined up hole in both tubes. The outermost tube would be slid forward a bit and at the little hole where the monofilament leaves the body on the side would be sharpened sufficient to cut the monofilament. when the torpedo strikes a ship, the ship pushes the outer tube back, severing the monofilament, releasing the piston.
Or something like that. If done right, most parts could be plastic/very thin metal and ballasted/filled properly to float. behind that section, one could use the pager motor and a very small battery, such as a watch cell or if you are allowed a big enough diameter, nimh cells are available in .4" od... use a spring connection on the outside of the torp with a thin bit of plastic preventing contact to keep the fish off. launch from ship, plastic bit stays behind, torpedo starts...
Here's what I think your top-level objectives need to be:
- First & foremost, you need to develop something that somebody else is going to let you use in combat. You can't allow a weapon to be used from a range/position where the user can't be defeated by conventional guns. Don't just think from the user's perspective, consider "the other guy" as well, who's on the receiving end. Would you want somebody ELSE to be able to use a weapon against you, to which you have no effective counter? If a weapon can be launched from outside the effective range of its target's weapons, that's exactly what it is.
- Along with above, assume | | | |
|
Greg McFadden
Rear Admiral (RDML)
Posts:1416
| | 15 Jun 2008 10:47 AM | | quote:
- First & foremost, you need to develop something that somebody else is going to let you use in combat. You can't allow a weapon to be used from a range/position where the user can't be defeated by conventional guns. Don't just think from the user's perspective, consider "the other guy" as well, who's on the receiving end. Would you want somebody ELSE to be able to use a weapon against you, to which you have no effective counter? If a weapon can be launched from outside the effective range of its target's weapons, that's exactly what it is.
You entirely missed the point... I have no problem with longer range torpedoes being launched at me from outside what I can really hit someone at. heck, I regularly hit folks with my cruiser from 10 feet away with cannons [edited by JS]. If the torps run at appropriate speed, the odds of a long range hit are very very low, just like with real life. It is not like they are going to be some magic ray gun that will inevitably hit from across the pond. I am loath to limit peoples creativity to what someone perceives the impact on the game to be. the only truly valid point you bring up is the long term safety issue, which is another one that can be solved after someone has one that actually works. for those folks actually interested in working on this, please see the following picture to better understand what I was looking at.  | | | |
|
JustinScott
Founder
Rear Admiral (RADM)
Posts:2176
| | 15 Jun 2008 11:42 AM | | Most of the design makes sense. The battery's run is only about 1 minute, so it can be crazy small. Suggest rechargeable if possible, so all I have to do it plug it in for the next battle.
The only part that does not make sense is the monofilament. It could be just because I don't know what it is. However, I have a feeling that it is the key to triggering the warhead.
Feasability concern;
2 inch long (1:144) 3 inch long (1:96)
0.15 inch wide (144) 0.22 inch wide (96)
Something that small even if possible could not possibly travel in a straight line, in all but the smoothest seas.
-------
As far as should or should not be allowed, that is for the individual clubs to decide. Technology cannot help but to advance, it is up to the rules of engagement to decide if this is legal or not. That being said, I could easily come up with 100 unfair ways to legally beat up on other boats on the water... none of which is 'in the spirit of the game'.
----
Additionally, I doubt this would obsolete anything. The speed of the torpedo prevents that. These torps that greg is proposing will not be propelled by an explosion on the ship, rather self propelled via a small motor. As such they will travel at speeds similar to the ship (20-35+ knots) still vastly slower than guns. You conceveably would have time to run away or turn into them. I would fight the concept myself if they were not subject to the scale rules, meaning they better not go any faster than real torps did.
Real torps were used not only as a powerful punch weapon but as a travel deterent. If you know a torpedo is traveling somewhere directly in front of you, you will probably adjust course. I assume they would be used more as a tactical weapon than a main offensive one.
In practice (other than a deterrant) I think they would be very ackward to make a hit. (AS THEY SHOULD BE) They are a slow moving system, so long range is very much hit or miss. However, they would be quite hard to see unless you are looking for them, as they would be 'skipping' on the waters surface or just below it. (good for battle, bad for cleanup)
Close range, a torp boat would probably take massive damage trying to get in close enough to have a good hit. Again as it should be.
These things would more than likely tear a big hole in the hull right? similar to a ram? I'm worried that at close range, a big ship wouldn't be able to sink a torp boat before it got in close enough to torpedo it. That being said, a torpedo cannot be a one shot sinks a battleship weapon.
| | Cheers,
jks
DKM Tirpitz | |
|
Anachronus
Rear Admiral (RADM)
Posts:2183
| | 15 Jun 2008 12:09 PM | | That looks like a workable design. Though, I too can not figure out how it fires. The cutting the thread releases the rod, I understand, but how does the thread get cut. | | | I am prepared to meet my maker, whether He is prepared for the ordeal of meeting me is another matter.
-Sir Winston- | |
|
JohnmCA72
Commander
Posts:701
| | 15 Jun 2008 12:27 PM | | [I am offended that you are dismissing my arguments]
As for putting off safety issues until later, [I] think that's a mistake[...]. My natural tendency is design solutions into the product from the start rather than try to tack something on later. We cannot assume that everything is OK until proven otherwise, presume that "unlikely" is close enough to "never", & hope that any issues just go away or never actually come up at all.
[Edited by JS, Come on John... Greg's not trying to offend you.] | | | |
|
crzyhawk
Rear Admiral (RADM)
Posts:2130
| | 15 Jun 2008 12:27 PM | | Look carefully at the nose. The inner sleeve compresses, driving the blade back to sever the thread. | | | HMS Invincible
USS Salem (CA-139)
USS Belleau Wood (CVL-24)
| |
|
JustinScott
Founder
Rear Admiral (RADM)
Posts:2176
| | 15 Jun 2008 01:12 PM | | John / Greg,
Please watch yourselves. Both of you are very creative guys, and both passionate.
Greg, listen to what John's saying. He means to keep the game as balanced as possible, and that IS something that is OUR responsibility. We need to make sure we don't choose something that although worked in full scale war time, but gives unfair advantage in small scale. Things are not always 1:1.
John, look at the design Greg's proposing. What are the scenarios that will make this weapon unfair? Argue them. Change will happen; you only hope to direct it, not stop it.
| | Cheers,
jks
DKM Tirpitz | |
|
Anachronus
Rear Admiral (RADM)
Posts:2183
| | 15 Jun 2008 03:07 PM | | quote:
Originally posted by crzyhawk
Look carefully at the nose. The inner sleeve compresses, driving the blade back to sever the thread.
Duh. Me be dense some times. An excellent design then. | | | I am prepared to meet my maker, whether He is prepared for the ordeal of meeting me is another matter.
-Sir Winston- | |
|
JustinScott
Founder
Rear Admiral (RADM)
Posts:2176
| | 15 Jun 2008 03:24 PM | | quote:
Originally posted by Anachronus
quote:
Originally posted by crzyhawk
Look carefully at the nose. The inner sleeve compresses, driving the blade back to sever the thread.
Duh. Me be dense some times. An excellent design then.
Then how do you reload the thread? | | Cheers,
jks
DKM Tirpitz | |
|
Greg McFadden
Rear Admiral (RDML)
Posts:1416
| | 15 Jun 2008 03:29 PM | | hole thru center of warhead (not shown in diagram). the torp would come apart in the midsection to allow you to thread it with a new bit. tie knot at one end of line, pull thru setup, over-compress, tie knot at other end at approx right spot...
remember, baby steps get you to a functioning tool quicker than trying to design it all perfect at once
-Greg | | | |
|
Greg McFadden
Rear Admiral (RDML)
Posts:1416
| | 16 Jun 2008 10:00 AM | | There is another option I was thinking about... take the mechanism inside a pen, one of the ones that you click to push the pen out and click again to pull it back... if you take half the mechanism such that if you let pressure off the clicker it would always go to one position (rather than the in/out as a pen does) and use a bar that goes to the front of the torp to keep it "cocked". knock bar back, and the torp warhead fires. click like pen, pull rod forward, and torp is armed again. I'll see if I can draw it up... | | | |
|
Mike Horne
Ensign
Posts:234
| | 16 Jun 2008 12:29 PM | | I dunno, given John's argument about long term safety, I think charging the thing with air, and when it runs it's course is safe may be the way to go. Maybe if the air supply for the torp's firing system leaked, then we'd see the bubbles that we are hoping for. So, we find a plastic that's lighter than water, and find some way to set it up so releasing it from the boat doesn't trip the firing mechanism. Another point is getting permission rather than forgiveness... Will Namba cover the design? Kinda can shoot a lot of holes in the theory :) One things for sure, it will be a tricky and expensive thing to risk losing pondside for sure!
Mike | | | |
|